Congress Gears Up For A Fight Over Mass Timber Legislation

Congress Gears Up For A Fight Over Mass Timber Legislation

 

The battle over the 2017 Timber Innovation Act is gaining momentum in Washington, D.C., where two new Senate sponsors and four new Congress members have signed on to it since this past May. The pending legislation would provide funding for research into innovative wood materials and mass timber structures above 85 feet. The bill’s proponents are hoping that it will be an impetus for transforming cities and towns across the country with a bevy of mid-rise and high-rise mass timber buildings.

“I am very impressed with the large cross-aisle support,” Chadwick Oliver, director of Yale University’s Global Institute of Sustainable Forestry, said. “You have Bruce Westerman, a Republican congressman from Arkansas and Peter DeFazio, a Democrat from Oregon who has been on the side of environmental groups. This looks like a bill that is quite serious about moving forward.”

However, the concrete and steel industries are vigorously lobbying to derail the legislation, and have established a website called Build with Strength that contains a detailed critique of the new generation of wood buildings. “It is a piece of legislation that props up one industry over another and we think that it is misguided and dangerous,” Kevin Lawlor, a spokesperson from Build with Strength, said. “We don’t think that it is safe in three-to-five story buildings, and we don’t think that it is safer in taller buildings.”

The wood products industry, the U.S. Forest Service, and other advocates claim that technological advances make the new generation of tall timber buildings more fire resistant. In fact, according to Dr. Patricia A. Layton, director of the Wood Utilization + Design Institute at Clemson University, that is because of the way it chars in a fire: By insulating its interior, an exposed wood beam can actually be structurally stronger than a steel one. “Steel loses its strength at a lower temperature than does wood,” she explained. “If you expose concrete or steel it is combustible, and it does feel the effects of fire.”

Many of the act’s supporters say that allowing buildings to be built from wood technologies such as cross-laminated timber (CLT) will result in a host of economic and environmental benefits. Most of the Timber Innovation Act’s sponsors hail from states where the wood industry is struggling to recoup from the recent housing downturn and also suffering from the decrease in demand for paper that is a result of the increasing digitalization of the economy.

From The Architects Newspaper: archpaper.com

 

Latest News

Find Us On Social

Newsletter

The monthly Panel World Industry Newsletter reaches over 3,000 who represent primary panel production operations.

Subscribe/Renew

Panel World is delivered six times per year to North American and international professionals, who represent primary panel production operations. Subscriptions are FREE to qualified individuals.

Advertise

Complete the online form so we can direct you to the appropriate Sales Representative. Contact us today!

Mass Timber: From ‘What The Heck Is That?’ To ‘Wow!’

Mass timber is sprouting up in cities in North America and abroad. After years of feasibility studies and design proposals, buildings six stories or taller constructed primarily from pre-engineered wood products are being considered in cities around the world.

In London, one proposal, called the Splinter, would rise to 100 stories. In Chicago, Perkins+Will (in collaboration with Thornton Tomasetti and the University of Cambridge) has designed an 80-story high-rise with 300 duplex apartments. If built, River Beech—a key component of P+W’s master plan for the Riverline development—would be made almost entirely from mass timber.

So-called “plyscrapers” are still a tiny sliver of nonresidential construction. In the past five years, only 17 buildings seven stories or taller have been completed worldwide, mostly in Europe and Canada. Six more have started construction, according to the American Wood Council.

Mass production of timber for high-rise construction is still in its infancy in North America. Specifying these products in the U.S. faces resistance from insurers, regulators, and code officials. Steel fabricators and concrete suppliers disparage mass timber for taller buildings on the grounds of safety and durability.

Proponents cite the speed at which tall buildings can be constructed using pre-engineered wood and mass timber’s ability to sequester carbon. Joey-Michelle Hutchison, RA, LEED AP BD+C, CSBA, Associate Vice Principal, CallisonRTKL, says, “The role of mass wood is going to grow because of the demand for sustainable design.” Researchers from Yale and the University of Washington, in a study published in the Journal of Sustainable Forestry (March 28, 2014), postulated that using wood substitutes for constructing buildings (and bridges) could save 14–31% of global CO2 emissions.

From Building Design + Construction: https://www.bdcnetwork.com/mass-timber-what-heck-wow

Study: Wooden Buildings Are Cheaper And Cleaner

Although it may seem counter-intuitive, it would be better if we built buildings from wood than from concrete, brick, aluminum and steel.

We use millions of tons of these modern materials every year. They have many valuable properties, but are energy-intensive to create, accounting for around 16% of the entire planets’ fossil fuel production. Instead we could be using wood, which is also strong, renewable, and plentiful – we use only a fraction of the world’s available forestry resources.

Our research, published in the Journal of Sustainable Forestry, estimated that the world’s forests contain about 385 billion cubic meters of wood, with an additional 17 billion cubic meters growing each year. A mere 3.4 billion cubic meters is harvested each year, mostly for subsistence fuel burning; the rest rots, burns in fires, or adds to forests’ density.

Swapping steel, concrete, or brick for wood and specially engineered wood equivalents would drastically reduce global carbon dioxide emissions, fossil fuel consumption and would represent a renewable resource. What’s more, managed properly this can be done without loss of biodiversity or carbon storage capacity.

In our study undertaken by scientists from the Yale School of Forestry & Environmental Studies and the University of Washington’s College of the Environment we evaluated various scenarios including leaving forests untouched, burning wood for energy and use of wood as a construction material.

From Architecture & Design: https://www.architectureanddesign.com.au/comment/swap-steel-concrete-and-brick-for-wood-wooden-buil?utm_source=WIT042415&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=WeekInTrees